A city poll of the community showed that 88 percent of respondents

Question

A city poll of the community showed that 88 percent of respondents believe that an appropriate amount of the city budget is being spent on parks and recreation. It seems, then, that any significant increase in the city budget should be spent on something other than parks and recreation.

Which one of the following describes a flaw in reasoning in the above argument?

A. The argument confuses a coincidence with a correlation.

B. The argument confuses the percentage of the budget spent on parks and recreation with the amount of money spent on parks and recreation.

C. The argument does not justify its presumption that what is true of a portion of the budget also applies to the total budget.

D. The argument fails to consider that less money could be spent and a significant percentage of the community would still find that amount to be appropriate.

E. The argument fails to consider that if more money from the budget were spent on parks and recreation, then an even larger percentage of the community might approve of that use of the budget.

LSAT

AshutoshB · Answer

Official Explanation

The best answer is E.This is a flaw question. Answer choice E correctly points out that the author of the argument is assuming that the proportion of city residents who approve of the level of funding for parks and recreation cannot be raised above 88 percent. While such an outcome is not guaranteed simply by spending more public money on parks and recreation, it is at least a plausible, possible outcome that prevents reaching the argument’s conclusion, that any new money should be spent on some other purpose, without more evidence. The other answer choices describe common argument flaws that are simply not relevant to the stimulus argument.

Hit Kudos

alexphamster · Answer

Prethinking: How many didn't respond? Which individuals responded? Would they still feel it's appropriate if the amount of money was increased?

A. The argument confuses a coincidence with a correlation. irrelevant 
B. The argument confuses the percentage of the budget spent on parks and recreation with the amount of money spent on parks and recreation. irrelevant 
C. The argument does not justify its presumption that what is true of a portion of the budget also applies to the total budget.  irrelevant 
D. The argument fails to consider that less money could be spent and a significant percentage of the community would still find that amount to be appropriate.  Strengthens argument, trick answer 
E. The argument fails to consider that if more money from the budget were spent on parks and recreation, then an even larger percentage of the community might approve of that use of the budget.  Correct

TheNightKing · Answer

Conclusion: It seems, then, that any significant increase in the city budget should be spent on something other than parks and recreation.

Option E is basically saying that we should stop when we have 100% people agreeing ? That's not right. D is a better choice according to me. May be the people aren't are aware of how much amount is sufficient? If you tell me that for example "US is spending 2b$ this year on defence" I might be okay with that because I have no idea what the actual amount should be. Rather than making 100% of people say yes for 2b$.

Can someone please explain?

saishivapriya · Answer

A city poll of the community showed that 88 percent of respondents believe that an appropriate amount of the city budget is being spent on parks and recreation. It seems, then, that any significant increase in the city budget should be spent on something other than parks and recreation.

Which one of the following describes a flaw in reasoning in the above argument?

A. The argument confuses a coincidence with a correlation.

B. The argument confuses the percentage of the budget spent on parks and recreation with the amount of money spent on parks and recreation.

C. The argument does not justify its presumption that what is true of a portion of the budget also applies to the total budget.

D. The argument fails to consider that less money could be spent and a significant percentage of the community would still find that amount to be appropriate.

E. The argument fails to consider that if more money from the budget were spent on parks and recreation, then an even larger percentage of the community might approve of that use of the budget.

For me, D is wrong because, it doesn't necessarily identify the flaw in the reasoning. 
The reasoning here is that since 88% of the people believe the current budget to be appropriate, any significant increase in city budget should be spent on other stuff.

While D does state that the argument doesn't consider that less money could be spent and a significant percentage of the community would still find that amount to be appropriate, this doesn't attack our reasoning-conclusion pair i.e. already most people approve current budget and hence a significant increase in budget should not go to recreation.
It might be true that the citizens may think a little less than needed budget to be enough, but what about a "significant" increase. This may fairly result in a negative outcome of disapproval.

Hence I felt E is a better choice here.

sssanskaar · Answer

Can someone please explain why is B not a correct option?

If the a particular "appropriate" amount of the city budget is being spent on the parks and rec, is that amount or percentage of the city budget enough for the current needs of the parks and rec?

I believe that B is addressing a bigger issue. Experts, please weigh in.

unraveled · Answer

A city poll of the community showed that 88 percent of respondents believe that an appropriate amount of the city budget is being spent on parks and recreation. It seems, then, that any significant increase in the city budget should be spent on something other than parks and recreation.

Which one of the following describes a flaw in reasoning in the above argument?

A. The argument confuses a coincidence with a correlation.

B. The argument confuses the percentage of the budget spent on parks and recreation with the amount of money spent on parks and recreation.

C. The argument does not justify its presumption that what is true of a portion of the budget also applies to the total budget.

D. The argument fails to consider that less money could be spent and a significant percentage of the community would still find that amount to be appropriate.

E. The argument fails to consider that if more money from the budget were spent on parks and recreation, then an even larger percentage of the community might approve of that use of the budget.

Between D and E which one is true to the passage. Knowing this answer would help striking off the wrong one. But here's the catch that i fell for. By reading D it looked certainly dead sure that this points the flaw. However, more troublesome is E as in it may or may not be true which is what makes it difficult to choose. 
If similar logic is applied to D then it is also a may or may not be case.

The two look equally good but this question is questionable.

bv8562 · Answer

MartyTargetTestPrep  Could you please explain why option D is incorrect and why option E is correct?

MartyTargetTestPrep · Answer

Here's the conclusion of the argument:

It seems, then, that any significant increase in the city budget should be spent on something other than parks and recreation.

We see that the conclusion is basically that NO MORE should be spent, or that the city should NOT spend more on parks and recreation.

Let's see what's wrong with (D).

D. The argument fails to consider that less money could be spent and a significant percentage of the community would still find that amount to be appropriate.

Notice that the conclusion does not conflict with the idea that less could be spent. After all, the idea that NO MORE should be spent is not in conflict with the idea that less could be spent. So, even if the argument had considered that less could be spent, the same conclusion would still make sense.

Furthermore, the argument doesn't need to consider that less could be spent. The argument is about only one thing that should be done if there is "any significant increase in the city budget": spend no more. Sure, it may be that less could be spent, but what could be done is not what the argument is about. It's solely about NOT spending more if there is an increase the budget.
Finally, the argument uses the fact that approval is at 88 percent to support its conclusion. That's strong support for the conclusion even if there would still be "significant" approval if less were spent.

So, the fact that the argument doesn't consider what (D) mentions is not a flaw.

Now, let's consider (E).

E. The argument fails to consider that if more money from the budget were spent on parks and recreation, then an even larger percentage of the community might approve of that use of the budget.

Notice that the conclusion that the city should NOT spend more is based on the fact that 88 percent of respondents believe that an appropriate amount of the budget is being spent. OK, great, but what if the budget increases? In that case, there is a bigger budget, and it may make sense to spend even more on parks and recreation. In fact, it could be that, in that case, even more than 88 percent of people would approve if more were spent.

So, as (E) say, the argument fails to consider that, under those changed circumstances, approval might be even higher if more were spent.

anshshiv · Answer

Why is B wrong?

Maybe the 88% respondents approve of the spend on parks and recreation with respect to the total budget. If the city budget increases, they may want more money to be spent on parks and recreation. Hence if no more money is spent even after total city budget has increased, the proportion of city residents who approve of the level of funding may reduce.

MartyTargetTestPrep   GMATNinja

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.

A city poll of the community showed that 88 percent of respondents

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

A city poll of the community showed that 88 percent of respondents

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards